Hebrews 5:3

In the third verse the apostle illustrates what he had asserted concerning the high priest, as to his being “compassed with infirmity,” from a necessary consequent thereof: he was to offer sacrifices for his own sins. Before, he had declared in general that the end of his office was to “offer gifts and sacrifices to God,” that is, for the sins of the people; but proceeding in his description of him, he mentions his own frailty, infirmity, and obnoxiousness unto sin. And this he did, that he might give an account of those known institutions of the law wherein he was appointed to offer sacrifices for his own sins also.

Hebrews 5:3. Καὶ διὰ ταύτην ὀφείλει, καθὼς περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ, οὕτω καὶ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ, προσφέρειν ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν.

For διὰ ταύτην one manuscript has δι ᾿αὐτήν, that is, ἀσθένειαν, “because of which infirmity.” Vulg. Lat., “propterea debet;” “wherefore,” or “for which cause he ought.” Or, as we, “and by reason hereof.” Syr., “so also for himself to offer for his own sins.”

Hebrews 5:3. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself to offer for sins.

Καὶ διὰ ταύτην : that is, say some, for διὰ τοῦτο, the feminine put for the neuter, by a Hebraism. Hence it is rendered by some “propterea.” But ταύτνη plainly and immediately refers unto ἀσθένειαν, “propter hanc,” or “istam infimitatem.” Had the high priest under the law been ἀναμάρτητος, without any sin, or sinful infirmity, as the Lord Christ was, he should have had nothing to do but to offer sacrifice for the sins of the people. But it was otherwise with him, seeing he himself also, as well they, was encompassed with sinful infirmities.

᾿Οφείλει, “he ought.” He ought to offer for his own sins, and that on a double account, whereinto this duty or necessity is resolved:

1. The nature of the things themselves, or the condition wherein he was. For seeing he was infirm and obnoxious unto sin, and seeing he did, as other men, sin actually in many things, he must have been ruined by his office if he might not have offered sacrifice for himself. It was indispensably necessary that sacrifices should be offered for him and his sin, and yet this no other could do for him; he ought therefore to do it himself.

2. The command of God. He ought so to do, because God had so appointed and ordained that he should. To this purpose there are sundry express legal institutions, as we shall see immediately.

Καθὼς περὶ τοῦ λαοῦ, “in like manner as for the people;” that is, either the whole people collectively, or all the people distributively, as their occasions did require. In the first way the great anniversary sacrifice which he celebrated in his own person for the whole body of the people is principally intended, Leviticus 16:16; Leviticus 16:24. Add hereunto the daily sacrifice belonging unto the constant service of the temple, which is therefore used synecdochically for the whole worship thereof, Daniel 8:11-12, for herein also was the whole church equally concerned. In the latter way, it respects all those occasional sacrifices, whether for sin or trespasses, or in free-will offerings, which were continually to be offered, and that by the priests alone.

Οὕτω καὶ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ, “so for himself;” in like manner, on the same grounds and for the same reasons that he offered for the people. He had a common interest with them in the daily sacrifice, which was the public worship of the whole church; and therein he offered sacrifice for himself also, together and with the people. But besides this there were three sorts of offerings that were peculiar unto him, wherein he offered for himself distinctly or separately:

1. The solemn offering that ensued immediately on his inauguration:

Leviticus 9:2, “And he said unto Aaron, Take thee a young calf for as in offering, and a ram for a burnt-offering, without blemish, and offer them before the Lord.” This was for himself, as it is expressed, Leviticus 9:8, “Aaron therefore went unto the altar, and slew the calf, which was the sin-offering for himself.” After this he offered distinctly for the people “a kid of the goats for a sin-offering,” Leviticus 9:3; Leviticus 9:15. And this was for an expiation of former sins, expressing the sanctification and holiness that ought to be in them that draw nigh unto God.

2. There was an occasional offering or sacrifice which he was to offer distinctly for himself, upon the breach of any of God's commandments by ignorance, or any actual sin: Leviticus 4:3, “If the priest theft is anointed do sin according to the sin of the people” (that is, in like manner as any of the people do sin), “then let him bring, for his sin which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the Lord for a sin-offering.” After which there is a sacrifice appointed of the like nature, and in like manner to be observed,

(1.) For the sin of the whole people, Leviticus 4:13; and then

(2.) For the sin of any individual person, Leviticus 4:27.

And hereby the constant application that we are, on all actual sins, to make unto the blood of Christ for pardon and purification was prefigured.

3. There was enjoined him another solemn offering, on the annual feast, or day of expiation, which he was to begin the solemn service of that great day withal: Leviticus 16:3, “Aaron shall thus come into the holy place with a young bullock for a sin-offering, and a ram for a burnt-offering.” Leviticus 16:11, “And Aaron shall bring the bullock of the sin-offering, which is for. himself, and shall make an atonement for himself, and for his house, and shall kill the bullock of the sin-offering which is for himself.” After this, he offers also on the same day, for the sins of the people, Leviticus 16:15; a bullock for himself, and a goat for the people. And this solemn sacrifice respecting all sins and sorts of them, known and unknown, great and small, in general and particular, represents our solemn application unto Christ for pardon and sanctification; which as to the sense of them may be frequently renewed. The Jews affirm that the high priest used at his offering this sacrifice the ensuing prayer: אנה השם עויתי פשעתי חטאתי לפניך אני וביתי ובני אהרן עם קדושך אנא השם כפר נא לעונות ולפשעי ולחטאי שעויתי ושפשעתי ושחטאתי לפניך אני וביתי ובני אהרן עם קדושך ככתב בתורת משה עבדך כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם לטהר אתכם מכל חטאתיכם לפניִה

that is,

“I beseech thee, O Lord, I have done perversely, have transgressed, I have sinned before thee; I and my house, and the children of Aaron, and thy holy people. I beseech thee, O Lord, be propitious unto, or pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquities, transgressions, and sins, wherein I have done amiss, transgressed, and sinned before thee, I and my house, and the sons of Aaron, and thy holy people; according as it is written in the law of Moses thy servant., that in this day thou wouldst pardon and purify us from all our sins.” Mishnaioth, Tract. Jom. Perek.

4. And all these several sorts of sacrifices for himself were, all of them, as our apostle here speaks, ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν, “for sins.” And this was necessary, because he was encompassed with infirmities and obnoxious unto sin, and so stood in no less need of expiation and atonement than the people.

Expositors generally agree that this is peculiar unto the high priest according to the law, the Lord Christ being neither intended nor included in this expression; for we have showed that, in this comparison, the things compared being on some accounts infinitely distant, there may be that in the one which nothing in the other answers unto. And that the Lord Christ is not intended in this expression appears,

1. The necessity of this offering for himself by the high priest arose from two causes, as was declared:

(1.) From his moral infirmity and weakness; that is, unto obedience, and obnoxiousness to sin.

(2.) From God's command and appointment; he had commanded and appointed that he should offer sacrifice for himself. But in neither of these had our Lord Christ any concern; for neither had he any such infirmities, nor did God ordain or require that he should offer sacrifice for himself.

2. Actually Christ had no sin of his own to offer for, nor was it possible that he should; for he was made like unto us, “yet without sin.” And the offering of the priest here intended was of the same kind with that which was for the people. Both were for actual sins of the same kind; one for his own, the other for the people's.

3. It is expressly said, that the Lord Christ “ needed not, as they to offer first for his own sins, and then for the people's;” and that because he was in himself “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners,” Hebrews 7:26-27. This, therefore, belonged unto the weakness and imperfection of the legal high priest.

Two expositors of late have been otherwise minded. The first is Crellius or Schlichtingius, who says that the infirmities and evils that Christ was obnoxious unto, are here, by a catachresis, called “sins;” and for them he offered for himself. The other is Grotius, who speaks to the same purpose:

“Cum hoc generaliter de omni sacerdote dicitur, sequitur Christum quoque obtulisse pro se ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν, i.e., ut a doloribus illis qui peccatorum poenae esse solent, et occasione peccatorum nostrorum ipsi infiigebantur, posset liberari;” “Whereas this is spoken generally of every priest, it follows that Christ also offered for himself for sins; that is, that he might be freed from those pains which are wont to be punishments of sins, and which, on the occasion of our sins, were inflicted on him.”

It is well enough known what dogma or opinion is intimated in these expressions. But I answer,

1. This assertion is not universal and absolute concerning every high priest, but every high priest that was “under the law,” who was appointed to be a type of Christ, so far as was possible by reason of his infirmities.

2. It is not without danger, to say that “Christ offered for himself ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν.” He “knew no sin,” he “did no sin,” and therefore could not offer a sin-offering for himself. His “offering himself to God for us.” “making his soul an offering for sin,” our sins, his being “made sin for us,” to make “atonement” or “reconciliation” for our sins, is fully declared; but this offering for himself, especially for sin, is nowhere taught nor intimated.

3. If he be intended here, then must he offer for himself, as the high priest did of old; this the letter of the text enforceth. But the high priest of old was to offer distinctly and separately, “first for himself, and then for the people.” So the words require it in this place, by the notes of comparison and distinction, κάθως and οὕτω, “as for the people, so” (or “in like manner”) “for himself.” Therefore if the Lord Christ be intended, he must offer two distinct sacrifices, one for himself, another for us. Now, whereas this he needed not to do, nor did, nor could do, it is undeniably manifest that he hath no concern in this expression.

There remaineth one difficulty only to be removed, which may arise from the consideration of this discourse. For it the high priest of old, notwithstanding his own sins, could first offer for himself and then for the people, and so make expiation for all sin, what necessity was there that our high priest should be absolutely free from all sin, as our apostle declares that he was, and that it was necessary he should be, Hebrews 7:26-27; for it seems he might first have offered for his own sin, and then for ours?

Ans. 1. It is one thing to expiate sin typically, another to do it really; one thing to do it in representation, by virtue of somewhat else, another to do it effectually by itself. The first might be done by them that were sinners, the latter could not.

2. On that supposal it would have been indispensably necessary that our high priest must have offered many sacrifices. Once he must have offered for himself, wherein we should have had no concern; and then he must again have offered himself for us. Hence, whereas he had nothing to offer but himself, he must have died and been offered more than once; which lay under all manner of impossibilities.

3. That a real atonement might be made for sin, it was required that our nature, which was to suffer and to be offered, should be united unto the divine nature in the person of the Son of God; but this it could not be had it not been absolutely sinless and holy. Some observations ensue.

The order of God's institution, with respect unto the sacrificing of the high priest for himself and the people, is observable; and this was, that he should first offer for himself, and then for them. This order was constant, and is especially observable in the great anniversary sacrifice for atonement on the day of expiation, Leviticus 16. Now the reason of this was,

1. Typical, that having first received pardon and purification for himself, he might the better prefigure and represent the spotless holiness of our high priest in his offering of himself for us.

2. Moral, to declare how careful they ought to be of their own sins who deal about the sins of others. And we may observe that,

Obs. 1. The absolute holiness and spotless innocency of the Lord Christ in his offering of himself had a signal influence into the efficacy of his sacrifice, and is a great encouragement unto our faith and consolation.

This our apostle informs us to have been necessary, Hebrews 7:26, τοιοῦτος γὰρ ἡμῖν ἔπρεπεν ἀρχιερεύς, “It was meet” (convenient, necessary, for and unto us) “that we should have such an high priest as was holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.” No other sort of high priest could have done what was to be done for us. Had he had any sin of his own he could never have taken all sin from us. From hence it was that what he did was so acceptable with God, and that what he suffered was justly imputed unto us, seeing there was no cause in himself why he should suffer at all. This, therefore, is frequently mentioned and insisted on where his sacrifice is declared: 2 Corinthians 5:21,

“He made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” He was “made sin for us” when he was made a “sacrifice for sin,” when “his soul was made an offering for sin.” Hereon depends our being “made the righteousness of God in him,” or righteous before God through him; but not on this as absolutely considered, but as “he was made sin who knew no sin,” who was absolutely innocent and holy. So the apostle. Peter, mentioning the redemption which we have by his blood, which was in the sacrifice of himself, says it was “as of a lamb without blemish and without spot,” 1 Peter 1:19. And treating again of the same matter, he adds, “Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth,” 1 Peter 2:22. So Romans 8:3. And we may see herein,

1. Pure, unmixed love and grace. He had not the least concern in what he did or suffered herein for himself. This was “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,” that being “rich, for our sakes he became poor.” All that he did was from sovereign love and grace. And will he not pursue the same love unto the end?

2. The efficacy and merit of his oblation, that was animated by the life and quintessence of obedience. There were in it the highest sufferings and the most absolute innocency, knit together by an act of most inexpressible obedience.

3. The perfection of the example that is set before us, 1 Peter 2:21-22. And from hence we may also observe, that,

Obs. 2. Whosoever dealeth with God or man about the sins of others, should look well, in the first place, unto his own. The high priest was to take care about, and “first to offer for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people.” And they who follow not this method will miscarry in their work. It is the greatest evidence of hypocrisy, for men to be severe toward the sins of others and careless about their own. There are four ways whereby some may act with respect unto the sins of others, and not one of them wherein they can discharge their duty aright, if in the same kind they take not care of themselves in the first place.

1. It is the duty of some to endeavor the conversion of others from a state of sin. As this belongs to parents and governors in their place, so is it the chief work of ministers, and principal end of the ministry. So the Lord Christ determines it in his mission of Paul: “I send thee to the Gentiles, to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and an inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me,” Acts 26:17-18. shall he apply himself hereunto, how shall he be useful herein, who was never made partaker of this mercy himself? How can they press that on others which they neither know what it is, nor whether it be or no, any otherwise than as blind men know there are colors? By such persons are the souls of men ruined, who undertake the dispensation of the gospel unto them for their conversion unto God, knowing nothing of it themselves.

2. It is our duty to keep those in whom we are concerned as much as in us lieth from sinning, or from actual sin. “These things I write unto you,” saith the apostle, “that ye sin not.” 1 John 2:1. With what. confidence, with what conscience, can we endeavor this toward others, if we do not first take the highest care herein of ourselves? Some that should watch over others are open and profligate sinners themselves. The preaching, exhortations, and reproofs of such persons do but render them the more contemptible; and on many accounts tend to the hardening of those whom they pretend to instruct. And where men “regard iniquity in their hearts,” although there be no notoriety in their transgressions, yet they will grow languid and careless in their watch over others; and if they keep up the outward form of it, it will be a great means of hardening themselves in their own sin.

3. To direct and assist others in the obtaining pardon for sin is also the duty of some. And this they may do two ways:

(1.) By directing them in their application unto God by Jesus Christ for grace and mercy;

(2.) By earnest supplications with them and for them. And what will they do, what can they do in these things sincerely for others, who make not use of them for themselves? look on this as one of the greatest blessings of the ministry, that we have that enjoined us to do with respect unto others which may sanctify and save their souls; and God hath so ordered things that we neither can nor will diligently attend unto any thing of that kind towards others concerning which we do not first endeavor to have its effect upon ourselves.

4. To administer consolation under sinning, or surprisals with sin, unto such as God would have to be comforted, is another duty of the like kind. And how shall this be done by such as were never cast down for sin themselves, nor ever spiritually comforted of God? It behoves us, therefore, in all things wherein we may deal with others about sin, to take care of ourselves in the first place, that “our consciences be purged from dead works,” that in all we do we may “serve the living God.”

Obs. 3. No dignity of person or place, no duty, no merit, can deliver sinners from standing in need of a sacrifice for sin. The high priest, being a sinner, was to “offer for himself.”

Obs. 4. It was a part of the darkness and bondage of the church under the old testament, that their high priests had need to offer sacrifices for themselves and their own sins. This they did in the view of the people; who might fear lest he could not fully expiate their sins who had many of his own, and was therefore necessitated in the first place to take care of himself. It is a relief to sinners, that the word of reconciliation is administered unto them, and the sacrifice of Christ proposed, by men subject unto the like infirmities with themselves; for there is a testimony therein, how that they also may find acceptance with God, seeing he deals with them by those who are sinners also. But these are not the persons who procure the remission, or have made the atonement which they declare. Were it so, who could with any confidence acquiesce therein? But this is the holy way of God: Those who are sinners declare the atonement which was made by him who had no sin.